groking about dynamic language.

[David Broadwell (remove spam.)]

oops.. didn't mean to get a thread, re-posted in as new message.


David Broadwell wrote:
> 
> am i correct tht only a dynamic langugage would be capable of the
> follwing assosiation without a TON of code to specifically define the
> behaviours?
> 
> for example, i have a number of predefined classes that instanceinto
> 'tool' objects. (tool objects work on other ojects only).
> 
> let us uas i also have annother object, a light switch (wall mount),
> wrapped in a 'wall mount plate wrapper' that requires a screwdriver tool
> object to unwrap.
> 
> in a dynamic language i just pick up the screwdriver and let the
> 'dynmaic' type bindings choose whych screwdriver tip to use on the
> plate. (if we have the appropriate type)
> 
> ~Right~?
> 
> (this happens to me.. and i have to say this is a extention of my
> brocling that led to understanding OO proper.. much like what happened
> to understand electrons and electronics MANY years ago)